The Many Faces of Nationalism: A Defense of Hindutva Against Unfair Criticism

Nationalism, a force that binds people through shared identity, culture, or values, takes diverse forms across the globe, each shaped by its historical and cultural context. From the civic nationalism of the United States to the ethnic nationalism of 19th-century Europe, from Swami Vivekananda’s spiritual vision of Indian unity to Yoram Hazony’s defense of the nation-state, nationalism reflects the unique aspirations and challenges of societies. Yet, Hindutva, or Hindu nationalism, faces disproportionate scrutiny, particularly from left-leaning academics who often exhibit a native bias against Hinduism, rooted in their secular, universalist frameworks. In reality, Hindutva is as context-dependent as any nationalist ideology, shaped by India’s history of cultural resilience and external pressures. Its global outlook, encapsulated in the principle swadesho bhuvana trayam*, a principle more inclusive than vasudhaiva kutumbakam – whole world is one family), reveals a pragmatic adaptability that critics frequently ignore. 

This three-part article explores the spectrum of nationalism, critiques the unfair targeting of Hindutva, and defends its legitimacy as a context-driven ideology, drawing on comparisons with Vivekananda, Western models, and Hazony’s framework.

Part 1: The Spectrum of Nationalism and Hindutva’s Context

Nationalism is not a singular ideology but a spectrum of expressions, each rooted in the historical and cultural realities of its people. In the West, civic nationalism, as seen in the United States or France, unites people through shared political values—democracy, individual rights, and constitutional loyalty—often transcending ethnic or religious divides. The U.S., for instance, defines its identity through citizenship and the “American Dream,” welcoming diverse groups under a civic umbrella. Ethnic nationalism, prominent in 19th-century Germany or Italy, emphasizes cultural, linguistic, or ancestral ties, as seen in German unification under Bismarck, which prioritized linguistic unity but often marginalized Jews or Poles. Yoram Hazony, in The Virtue of Nationalism (2018), argues that nationalism, rooted in mutual loyalty and shared culture, is a natural and moral framework for self-determination, contrasting it with the homogenizing tendencies of globalism or imperialism, such as the European Union or historical empires.

In India, nationalism has taken unique forms. Swami Vivekananda (1863–1902), a spiritual luminary, articulated a nationalism grounded in Hinduism’s universalist philosophy, viewing religion as India’s unifying force. In his 1893 Chicago address, he emphasized tolerance, seeing all religions as paths to truth, and urged Indians to revive their spiritual heritage to counter British colonial oppression. His nationalism was apolitical, focusing on individual moral growth and service through the Ramakrishna Mission, which promoted education and healthcare. Vivekananda’s vision was inclusive, embracing Muslims and Christians as part of India’s pluralistic fabric, and global, encouraging engagement with modern science while preserving spiritual roots.

Hindutva, articulated by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar in Hindutva: Who is a Hindu? (1923), defines Indian identity through Hindu civilization—its culture, history, and Indic religions (Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Sikhism). A Hindu,  to Savarkar, is one who sees India as both fatherland (pitribhumi) and holy land (punyabhumi), a criterion that includes Indic faiths but excludes Islam and Christianity, whose holy sites lie abroad. Hindutva seeks to unify India’s diverse communities under a shared cultural heritage, responding to historical threats like Islamic invasions, British colonialism, and missionary conversions. Unlike Vivekananda’s spiritual focus, Hindutva is politically assertive, with organizations like the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) advocating policies to protect Hindu interests and counter perceived minority appeasement.

Hindutva’s context is critical: India’s history of cultural fragmentation under Mughal rule and British colonialism, which suppressed Hindu practices and promoted conversions, shaped its defensive posture. Critics, particularly left-leaning academics, often portray Hindutva as exclusionary or supremacist, ignoring this historical backdrop. Yet, nationalism is inherently context-dependent—Western ethnic nationalism responded to feudal fragmentation, civic nationalism to revolutionary ideals, and Vivekananda’s vision to colonial subjugation. Hindutva’s emphasis on Hindu culture is no less legitimate, reflecting India’s need for cohesion amid diversity and external pressures.

*Swadesho Bhuvana Trayam” is a Sanskrit phrase that translates to “My country is the three worlds” or “The three worlds are my homeland.” It reflects a profound sense of universal belonging, suggesting that one’s true home encompasses the entire cosmos—earth, heaven, and the intermediate realms—transcending narrow geographic or national boundaries